Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • She's an only child and he as a brother and sister. He has no will and we have done a check on this to find out if he had left one and nothing has come up. He has savings of around 28k His sister and brother are well off so 28k is nothing to them and aren't interested in his money. This just leaves my wife/his daughter. Would this still need to go to probate there is no estate e.g house or business to sell and the amount left in his bank is just small? When his wife died they just closed her bank account and moved her money across to his account and we just assumed that once my wife has handed in the death certificate and shown evidence of who she is the same would apply to her? We don't know yet the council have only just written to us today with a guide of what to do next.  
    • Did your FiL leave a Will and if so who is the Executor? Strictly speaking banks could refuse to take instructions until Probate is granted but In practice I would expect the bank to take instructions to cancel the DD if the Executor presents the death certificate and a certified copy of the Will
    • Hi   Sorry I probably wasn't clear enough. He had lived in the flat until December 2022 with Dementia by this time it was unsafe for him to have capacity to live on his own and he had to move into a nursing home. We had left it too late to apply for power of attorney so approached a solicitor in March last year for Deputyship. We were still in the process of dealing with it by May 2024. He passed away a few weeks ago and the solicitor was contacted to halt the application and we will just pay the fees of what work he has done up until now. My wife was the named person on her dads bank account but we didn't have the ability to alter any direct debits hence the reasons for applying for Deputyship as we were having problems trying to stop some payments coming out of his account Eon being another difficult company. We kept his flat on from December 2022 - August 2023. it was at this point I contacted Sancutary housing to inform them he was no longer living in the flat, it had been cleared out and was ready for a new tenant and that he had Dementia and had moved into a nursing home December 2022 and explained the reasons why we kept it on. As the named person to speak on his behalf I asked them what proof they needed in order to give notice on the flat e.g proof of dementia and proof that he was living in a nursing home and anything else they wanted. The lady in the upstairs flat and some of the other residence in the street had asked about him and we had told them he had moved into a nursing home. The lady in the upstairs flat wanted his flat for medical reasons so asked us once we had given notice could be let her know and she'll ask them if she can have it. We explained the difficulties and it was left at that but I did tell her I would let her know once notice was given. I contacted the company by email a number of times and also telephone conversations and nobody followed it up and it wasn't till the end of February this year that the housing manager for the area wrote to our home address to ask about him that he had been to the flat a couple of times and nobody answered and he had asked some of the residence in the street and they hadn't seen him for sometime. There was an email address on the letter so I contacted him and copied in the last 2 emails I sent Sanctuary regarding me wanting to give notice on the flat for at least 9 months explaining that it went ignored as well as telephone calls. I also stated I wanted to have his rent payments returned from the date I wanted to give notice which was from August 2023 as the bank wouldn't let us stop the DD without POT or deputyship explaining we were in the process of Deputyship. He gave some excuse about not having POT to cancel on his behalf and spoke to someone in HR and said he would contact the nursing home to confirm he was there with Dementia and if it all checks out we can give notice on the flat which came to an end on the 22 March 2024. There was not mention of back payments for the rent already paid or the fact I had asked to give notice in August 2023. Despite someone living in the flat from 1st April they continue to take DD payments for the flat and have taken another 2 payments of £501. another concerning thing despite Eon not allowing us to cancel the DD to his account the lady upstairs informed Eon that she was moving into the flat February 2024 and Eon refunding the account to his bank and said in an email sorry you are leaving us and canceled his account. Something they wouldn't let us do but a stranger. She also changed her bank account to his address despite the fact notice hadn't been given on the flat yet. So we need to find out how much information Sanctuary actually had for her to tell her power company she was moving into the flat in February despite the housing manager only just getting in contact to find out where he was. So a complaint is going into Eon and Sanctuary and we are going to take advice and ask the bank to charge back the rent. My wife hasn't taken the death certificate to the bank yet to inform them of his passing.  
    • Yes, I believe the Starbucks was closed at the time the car was parked there 
    • hi lolerz many thanks for your reply and help. My 2 months has passed i was waiting until the court proceedings started. As i went through this process not that long ago, i shall look back at my old thread for how to respond. Ill get the docs scanned soon thanks.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Student Loans Co to use CRA to recover money


welshwizard
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5395 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

No, we didnt...

 

We didnt give consent to data sharing, so SLC are in breach of their own credit agreement and so can be sued for any and all damages caused by that breach.

 

 

They are stirring up a lot of sh!te for themselves. By the way, they do know this and so the CRA and DCAs. This was reported on, also in Cretin Today, last year.

 

https://www.credit-reporting-agency.co.uk/b2b/News/LoadArticle.asp?Position=8&ArticleID=50

 

"The Government is expected to confirm shortly that student loans taken out prior to 1998 will be shared with credit reference agencies and made visible to lenders later in 2008. Only negative information will be shared – those ex-students who miss payments.

Students who took loans prior to 1998 are responsible for making manual payments each month. More recent graduates have a percentage taken automatically from their wages each month.

 

Any late or missed payments recorded onto a credit report will have a negative impact on that individual’s ability to obtain credit.

 

The move is not without risk for the SLC, as it has not routinely sought consent from its borrowers to disclose to credit reference agencies as to how loans are being repaid. It is likely that the SLC will restrict the reporting to defaults, where it can claim that the ‘customer/lender relationship’ has broken down and where a default notice served in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Even this is a grey area, and if the SLC attempts to go further, for instance by reporting missed payments, it runs the risk of being in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998."

 

 

;-)

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have today received a letter from SLC stating that they intend to register a default against me with the CRAs unless I clear the arrears of about £2k. I don't have that sort of money. Is there any way I can avoid the default by making a payment arrangement with them or will they default me anyways?

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read this on 'checkmyfile'

 

The Student Loans Company (SLC) is set to get more aggressive with people who regularly miss repayments on their outstanding loans.

Until now, student loans have not appeared on credit files, mainly because the SLC does not have the specific consent of all students to send payment history information to the agencies, one of the basic requirements of sharing account performance data.

The SLC is to send letters to an estimated 60,000 borrowers considered as consistent ‘bad payers’, advising them that they have 28 days to bring their accounts into line. Anyone who fails to respond will be deemed to be in default. Defaults can be registered without the consent of borrowers, so the SLC has found a way to use credit reference agencies as a means of pressure to aid collection attempts.

This new move is likely only to affect those who took out student loans prior to 1998 and the SLC estimates that 30,000 people could see their credit ratings damaged. Defaults stay on credit files for a period of six years and can seriously damage an individual's hopes of getting other lines of credit, such as mortgages or personal loans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the principal of law was that they could not apply something like this retrospectively - i have at no stage agreed in any of my SLC agreements for them to share date with or look at my credit file.

Veester

 

"Challenges are what make life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful." -- Joshua J. Marine‏ ;)

 

Better than the truth itself is truthful living.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they need consent, tis the law. Who told you that-SLC, perchance?

 

Consent is not given in your credit agreement, so they dont have any consent.

 

Send the b'stards a section10 notice then sue them if they think they're hard enough.

 

Read the link I posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i've heard it from the ICO before in relation to a default placed by a bank.

 

Oh and the link you posted takes me to an article entitled "Banking and Credit Card Survey shows wide differences in how different banks are rated."

 

I already have 1 default which I have went through a lot of pain to try and get removed. It only has about 3 years to go, getting another one would extend my uncreditworthiness by another 3 years. I would rather pay and avoid another one than get it put on and have to fight again to get them to remove it.

Edited by knoxvillain

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

i've heard it from the ICO before in relation to a default placed by a bank.

 

The credit agreement you signed with your BANK would indeed, probably, contain a section whereby you explicitly give consent to data sharing in relation to defaults etc.

 

The agreement you signed with SLC does NOT.

 

Read your SLC agreement.

 

Oh and the link you posted takes me to an article entitled "Banking and Credit Card Survey shows wide differences in how different banks are rated."

 

The link was valid at the time I posted it. Looks like they've changed it- sneaky eh?

 

I already have 1 default which I have went through a lot of pain to try and get removed. It only has about 3 years to go, getting another one would extend my uncreditworthiness by another 3 years. I would rather pay and avoid another one than get it put on and have to fight again to get them to remove it.

 

That, of course is entirely your decision. Caggers simply offer advice to help you enforce your rights. Whether you choose to accept advice, freely given, is up to you.

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I'm saying though, regardless of whether the agreement had it in or not, according to ICO consent isn't the only way they can share info with the CRA. I'll try and track it down, i'm pretty sure organisations can share without specific consent.

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not when the data sharing relates to defaults on a credit agreement.

 

Pre-2007 Credit agreements are governed by Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

If it aint in your agreement, they cant do it.

 

They cant just make things up as they go along and hope to get away with it with everyone.

 

You track it down, whatever "it" is - then read the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

"No consent - no data processing"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defaults can be registered without the consent of borrowers, so the SLC has found a way to use credit reference agencies as a means of pressure to aid collection attempts.

 

From checkmyfile.com

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been getting phonecalls and letters from Thesis saying this:

 

"Please call us as a matter of some urgency as we do not want to make decisions about your account without discussing the matter with you in the first instance."

 

No idea what they want, I keep telling them to put it in writing on the phone.

 

Anyone else had letters like this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been getting phonecalls and letters from Thesis saying this:

 

"Please call us as a matter of some urgency as we do not want to make decisions about your account without discussing the matter with you in the first instance."

 

No idea what they want, I keep telling them to put it in writing on the phone.

 

Anyone else had letters like this?

 

Not had calls from them, but had a letter a while back

Thesis Servicing based in Caerphilly aquired my account after it had been sold to them and they are now dealing with the servicing of the account and NOT SLC, Glasgow.

 

They do seem reluctant to put anything in writing. I had to complain 3 times about lack of communication before they did actually respond.

 

Have it in writing now that the account is written off under section 12, so they can whistle now, one less A Hole to worry about

Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you get the account written off?

 

Sec12(b)(i) of the terms of the agreement my liability to repay these loans is cancelled.

12. The lender will cancel the borrower’s liability to repay the loan if the borrower-

(a) Dies,

(b) is not behind on any repayments under any agreement for a student loan-

(i) was under the age of 40 when his last agreement for a student loan was made and he reaches the age of 50 or when the last agreement for a student loan has been outstanding for not less than 25 years, which ever is the sooner, or

(ii) was aged 40 or older when his last agreement for a student loan was made and he reaches 60, or

© if the borrower can show the lender that he gets a disability related benefit and because of his disability is permanently unfit for work.

 

However this condition may not be applicable to your account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I had a letter through, although the person didn't want to put there name to it.

 

It said 'Please find enclosed a copy of your signed agreement I have included a clear copy (;)) and highlighted the issue we discussed.'

 

Now this was me baiting them asking where it said on the agreement they could share my data.

 

The agreement that is signed is unreadable other than the APR and the terms and completely illegiable.

 

The clear copy is nothing to do with me but the highlighted sections is:

Section 6 - Transfer of Rights and Duties

6.1 We shall have the right to assign or transfer all or any of our rights and duties under this Agreement to any person without your consent.

6.2 You shall have no right to assign or transfer any of your rights or duties under this Agreement.

 

Oh well then SLC you got me, I can't believe I was so stupid as to not realise that the bit about transfering rights actually means they can share my info with the CRA's DOH !!!

 

Are these clowns for real......? :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I got a reply from SLC collections today saying basically I have to come up with the £2k by fri or they will default me. They won't take reduced payments. So looks like I'll be getting another default then :(

 

Seems a bit strange that I'm offering to pay up yet they seem more interested in ruining my credit record than getting money out of me.

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had them take a payment this month despite no notice, no communication since they said they'd taken it over, and to the best of my knowl;edge no active DD agreement!

 

As I couldn't contact them today, I've sent one forceful email to them and will ring tuesday, but the more I read the more I see they'll just ignore the fact that they've taken the payment illegaly and state that I owe the loan.

 

btw do they even do the deferments that are part of the student loan agreement, because that's one of the things I had no communication on!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...